US $650-700. if ahs the level of Modo or similar.
For the same reasons posted by Jens and Richard, spetially Richard. In my CA experiments i´m finding the same problems.
BTW, i still use the EiM for hard surface modeling alongside SILO and a bit of ZBrush.
FelixCat
I really liked Modeler, But as a standalone product I think it will be tough to compete with Concepts 3d/Unlimited and formZ.
Modeler did have great interactive controls, and one truly unique feature- subdivision surfaces that could be switched over to Acis based nurbs patches (real curves no-polygons!)
Every other SDS modeler is polygon only.
I agree that Modeler was on it’s way to becoming a competitor for Industrial Design modeling. I was always excited by it’s potential.
Modeler’s tesselation was good. Using the code from modeler (if that’s feasible) for tesselation in Transporter/Animator would be great. Support for the STEP file format would allow import from most Engineering/CAID packages without needing to re-license ACIS.
Another option may be to partner with the Concepts folks and license some of Modeler’s unique attributes to them (Ubernurbs), and then offer a bundle deal with EIAS and Concepts 3d/Unlimited. Perhaps even integrating texture support, etc?
I would love to see Modeler come back, but unfortunately I now have investments in about four seperate modeling packages. I could see spending $500 on Modeler, but it would have to be very special for me to buy it.
I do think that newcomers to EIAS may be put-off by the lack of a bundled/ integrated modeler.
Well if we can convince EITG to enhance the plugin API and include a few more support tools in Animator, Paralumino could handle that. 
Pretty much only interested in SDS these days. Booleans is the only thing I really miss from NURBS modelling.
But tell me Brian, since you believe CA to be such an important feature for EIAS’ future. Wouldn’t it make more sense to develop a basic SDS modeller within Animator?
Manuel,
Everything has to start somewhere.
Animator is purely a polygonal package and any modeling tools created for Animator need to reflect that right now.(As you see in Paralumino’s current line up) Additonal plug in API enhancements and programmers’ tools would open the doors for developers to provide something even more sophisticated down the road.
Well coordinated and cooperative efforts between EITG and its 3rd party developers could make that happen since there is only so many resources to go around.
Manuel,
My desire for CA tools in EIAS is exactly that…my desire. It may not reflect what EITG may wish to ultimately focus on. Their marketing focus is their decision.
Its also the reason I push for opening up the package more. It allows 3rd party developers the opportunity to forge their own niche markets that may be outside of EITG’s primary marketing focus.
I think that’s healthy for a 3d software company and program to have.
I can´t agree more with your effords, Brian. Do you know if EiTG is listening? could be very interesting to know their feedback…
FelixCat
Of cause, thats why they came up with the Silo deal.
Seems to me that “newcomers” either simply get what everyone else is getting or just compare feature lists, in the latter case, EIAS can never win.
BTW, i still use EIM now and then, and also think its a huge loss to the package as a whole now its “dead” so to speak.
R
I’m sure their hands are full with the Intel port right now…but I’m pretty confident this forum and all of its threads are being examined. Its only a matter of time…and I’m a really patient man.
I would pay $1000 for a UB version of EIM’ last incarnation.
I like SDS modelers, but i really miss knives, booleans, and the accuracy of EIM.
Cheers
Hans
I think with the availability and pricing of Silo, it would be hard to make any dent in the market with a new or upgraded modeller from EI.
If they did revitalize EIM, I’d surely get the upgrade. But to start from scratch, especially
an sds modeller would be a tuff sell, in my opinion.
I rather they opened up camera to other software packages for rendering.
Mike Fitz
www.3dartz.com
Sorry to hijack the thread a bit: do any of you use EIM under Rosetta? Is it usable? I am looking forward to buying a Mac Pro and am afraid of losing EIM in the transition to Intel (at least until Parallels manages to support accelerated 3D graphics as they claim they are in the verge of achieving). I’ve seen no one give a definitive answer to these questions in any EI forum.
Back to the thread: when EIAS declared EIM dead, it sort of looked like they had some ideas to pursue if they ever produced a new modeling app. I wonder about them.
I thought their intention was to start putting modelling tools in Animator. But it was quite a while ago when they said that.
That’s the $64 question… or maybe $64,000. 
Who knows. It was obviously too much for EITG to maintain…unfortunately.
I have Formz, and am in the process of bringing myself up to speed. I still use
modeler and would purchase a new version without hesitation.
If anyone else has tried the NURBS based ‘moi3d’ (I posted a link on another thread), I’d be interested to hear comments on how it compares to EIM. I realise moi3d is still in beta but the developer seems to realise the importance of an uncluttered, user friendly UI.[/QUOTE]
I played about with moi for a short time and for what it does it does well. Very intuitive UI. Thanks for the link.
I still use Modeler all the time, which is probably not such a good idea considering development stopped 2-3? years ago. But its one of those programs that once you get up to speed on your’e hooked. For that reason, time invested in it, I would vote for Modeler. I have yet to see a better implementation of Layers and the knives and…
Sigh. Like anyone who used it for a while I thought it had great potential and just expected it to get better.
Mike.
This is all pie in the sky, as obviously the cost of proceeding with the acis thing was prohibitive. I can’t say what’s best for EI in modelling terms, as I don’t know what direction they are headed.
For myself, I lean towards the nurbs modelling for precision and machined type shapes, but I also like sds when its necessary. Whats wrong with the current available apps? Is it tesselation quality? The Concepts 3D modeller seems to be very capable, although I haven’t tested it thoroughly yet. I have Silo, but as yet unused. How are users rating that?
How realistic is it to expect an integrated modeller in Animator, short of the plug-in interface thing being improved or made more open and third parties being able to write stuff. But surely writing a set of modelling tools is a mammoth task? Does everyone want polygon tools, I hate formZ- ok I can see the use of vertex editing in animation.
Curently I’m thinking of getting the obj2fact plug, so I can use c4d modelling (I’m familiar with that). I use Rhino also, as its very solid, but doesn’t perform in certain areas like EIM, which I’m tesselating in (dvGarage version).
I suspect there will be no more development of EIM in the forseeable future, and for good reason. No doubt the number of geometry plug ins will increase, but as I see it Animator will continue to be a rendering environment. Multi threaded would be good…
Martin K
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.